Lefitst says A child is dead, but it wasn't the gun's fault

In response to the shooting by Jovan Belcher of his girlfriend and then himself, a woman wanted to know where I stood on the terrible tragedy involving a 2-year-old shot last week by his 4-year-old brother.

"How was the presence of the gun not responsible for his death?" she wrote. "Was the 4-year-old capable of and bound to kill the younger sibling anyway?''

Her email was sincere and civil, and she deserves a response.

The gun, as an instrument, caused the death of the child. But it seems to me that to her way of thinking, an unlocked window might have been responsible for his death had he tumbled through it or that an automobile was responsible for the death of a child standing on the rear seat and not safely harnessed in the event of an accident.

Facts disclosed by the Minneapolis police indicated that the 4-year-old found the loaded gun and was playing with it when he shot his little brother. What my correspondent and I certainly agree on is the horrible senselessness of the child's death. What we don't agree on is her preposterous wondering if the 4-year-old was bound to kill the younger sibling anyway.

Of course the 4-year-old was not bound to kill the sibling anyway. She can't know that. I can't know that. No child should have access to a gun. It should have been locked away and accessible only to an adult in the house. We don't know why it was out in the open, any more than we know why a window might be left unlocked in an apartment building

or a child doesn't get properly secured in those devilishly complicated infant seats. What should be held responsible for the death of a child left unattended in a bathtub while the parent is preoccupied with shopping online? Water? The Internet?

In any event, my correspondent's challenge to defend my position as it pertains to the Belcher case is not analogous. Belcher, the adult, was responsible. A 4-year-old child hasn't reached the age of reason.

It seems pointless to keep assigning responsibility to things instead of people. That just cultivates and sustains the victim mentality that is growing in this country. The parents of the children are responsible for leaving the instrument to be found and played with by an unsuspecting child. At 4, the child would have been unsuspecting of the consequences of playing with such a thing.

Now, if she wants me to agree that that family would have been better off without a gun in the house, I will agree.

And I would not find it disagreeable to have all the guns in the world sucked up to my supermagnet suspended above the Earth.

But I can't make myself believe that the gun, or its manufacturer, or the bullets, were responsible. The parents were responsible. The gun was just the thing, and I assign responsibility to people, not things.

My one crude rule of parenting was to keep the kid alive. Oh, we have other responsibilities as parents, to get them to learn and to be kind and to be healthy and to have a sense of faith and restraint and discipline and awareness of the world around them. But first and foremost, to keep them alive, to buckle them in, to put on the life jacket, to pay attention, to lock guns away, to not let them get too close to the cages at the zoo and on and on and on.

And then, when they leave, I suppose you could think that you have done your job, but it never stops, and the only thing you have left in your arsenal is faith and prayer.

Which is all that can be hoped for the parents of the child in Minneapolis, to hope they have a faith that will get them through this.

The 50-50-90 rule: Anytime you have a 50-50 chance of getting something right, there's a 90% probability you'll get it wrong. GOOD "JOB", unfortunately, you're missing all those killing involving guns have a common denominator....

In any event, my correspondent's challenge to defend my position as it pertains to the Belcher case is not analogous. Belcher, the adult, was responsible. A 4-year-old child hasn't reached the age of reason.It seems pointless to keep assigning responsibility to things instead of people. That just cultivates and sustains the victim mentality that is growing in this country. The parents of the children are responsible for leaving the instrument to be found and played with by an unsuspecting child. At 4, the child would have been unsuspecting of the consequences of playing with such a thing.Now, if she wants me to agree that that family would have been better off without a gun in the house, I will agree.And I would not find it disagreeable to have all the guns in the world sucked up to my supermagnet suspended above the Earth.But I can't make myself believe that the gun, or its manufacturer, or the bullets, were responsible. The parents were responsible. The gun was just the thing, and I assign responsibility to people, not things.My one crude rule of parenting was to keep the kid alive. Oh, we have other responsibilities as parents, to get them to learn and to be kind and to be healthy and to have a sense of faith and restraint and discipline and awareness of the world around them. But first and foremost, to keep them alive, to buckle them in, to put on the life jacket, to pay attention, to lock guns away, to not let them get too close to the cages at the zoo and on and on and on.And then, when they leave, I suppose you could think that you have done your job, but it never stops, and the only thing you have left in your arsenal is faith and prayer.Which is all that can be hoped for the parents of the child in Minneapolis, to hope they have a faith that will get them through this.http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_221485...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.